click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
-- the sequester was terrible. it was only done as a result of the republican blackmail on the debt ceiling. we increased the debt ceiling. people do not understand what that is. it is foreiling says money you have already spent. if you owe money, you cannot pay the bills. you have to pay the bills. otherwise the country defaults. the treasury people tell us that would be catastrophic. so you have to pay the bills. we have raised the debt ceiling 77 signs -- times since world war ii. there is political demagoguery from whatever clinical party was in go the minority. at the end, there was a vote for it. they say if you increase the debt ceiling coming up to cut spending by an incredible amount. over 10 years. white 10 years? arbitrary. -- why over 10 years? arbitrary. 2.4 congress voted for $ trillion in cuts. 2 trillion -- the sequester makes no sense at all. from our point of view, we do not have a that crisis or deficit crisis. we have a jobs crisis. we have reduced the deficit. the only intelligent way to measure deficit is as a percent of the economy. . percent of gdp that is for a simple r
black male on the debt ceiling. ceiling does not taste do not spend more money. -- does not say do not spend more money. you cannot payy, the bills and have to pay the bills. otherwise the country defaults. you have to pay the bills. ceilingraised the debt 77 times since world war ii. in the end, you have a vote for it and everybody knew that. until now. if you increase the debt ceiling, you have to cut spending by an incredible amount over 10 years. they were going to make the false. -- to make as default for the congress voted for will $0.20 trillion specified in -- todeficias a percent of the eco. if you el ten del dollars on a credit card, as that a lot or a little? -- if you owe $10,000 on your credit card, is that a little or a lot? to look and how burdensome the debt is, you have to take a percentage is. we have reduced the debt as a from 10.1% togdp 5.3%. we have cut it in half. the fastest reduction in the deficit since the demobilization after world war ii. vote against the sequester. at the three have done what we need to do on the debt right now. -- i think we have done
on the debt ceiling before his re-election. >> true. >> and so he forced this process to occur and insisted. >> but he didn't want the sequester cuts. >> well, no. he didn't want the cuts, but we had the sequester as a result of his demands. and i'm told my colleagues in the house that the sequester will stay in effect until there is an agreement that will include cuts and reforms that put us on a path to balance the budget over the next ten years. >> but no tax increases. >> no tax increases. the president already got $650 billion worth of tax increases january 1st. he got a trillion dollars worth of tax increases in obama care. this year the federal government will bring in more revenue than any year in our history and yet we're still going to have a trillion dollars budget deficit. spending is the problem. >> the white house says in response, yes, it's true. taxes went up more than $600 billion over ten years at the end of the year but it is also true the white house put $1.5 trillion worth of spending cuts in their budget. the truth is you're both right. i mean, they have offered spendi
. from there, a lot of the big stuff will go away and the next looming thing will be the debt ceiling. that is something we have not heard much about the last few weeks, but that is on the horizon. pete kasperowicz, thank you for talking with us. guest: sure, any kind. -- any time. >> expect a series of amendment votes. .ollow the senate on c-span two on c-span three, a group of middle east specialist will politics since the fall of hosni mubarak. divided between the muslim brotherhood and the secular opposition parties. the event is hosted by the rand corporation at 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span three. yesterday, former u.s. ambassador to iraq dissipated in a discussion about the current political situation in .raq and there is factions the discussion included the former iraqi ambassador to the u.s. and a former ambassador to the iraq ambassador. the 90 minute discussion was hosted here in washington. >> ladies and gentlemen, good morning. i am jessica mathews. it is a pleasure to welcome you today to take stock 10 years after the launch of what turned out to be america's second- long
a discussion on the lifting of the debt ceiling, some of the republicans who were there, actually walked out of the room. this year we didn't have that. so, you know, people were more willing to listen, but i think that the extreme wing of the tea party typically does not attend the harvard new members conference this. [laughter] in my experience. >> jessica mathews. among economists, is there significant debate about your estimate, your five to $6 trillion estimate, are you still -- what are the key issues that if we were in a roomful if economists we would be tangling with you about? >> well, that's a great question. i think that, you know, the original estimate when we had the original estimate 3 trillion, came back to his sort of early on from a former student of mine who was working in the administration and he was a brilliant student, fairly senior job at omb. he called me and he said i've been tasked with setting up a committee to scrutinize all the numbers in your book, and to discredit them. i just want to let you know that. and i said, okay. fine. and he came back to the six months
] >> two years ago when doug holtz-eakin and i were leading a discussion on the lifting of the debt ceiling, some other republicans who were there actually walked out of the room. this year we did not have that. more willing to listen. wing of theextreme tea party typically does not attend the harvard new members conferences. [laughter] >> among economists, is very significant debate about your estimate, and if so, what are would we bees that doing that we would be tangling with you on? >> that is a great question. the original estimates came back to us early on from a former student of mine who was working in the administration and who is a brilliant student from omb. he called me and said i have been tasked with setting up a committee to scrutinize all the numbers in your book and to discredit them. i just want to let you know that. i said ok, fine. he came back to me six months later and said i want to tell you we have been through the book with a fine tooth comb. we cannot discredit any of the numbers because they are all on our own numbers. we are going to argue that it was worth it. d
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6